Agent advising clients of proposed min block sizes in Rosebud

SMS were distributed today advising clients to contact agent re planning and development changes.
Agent is telling people that the local council are in the process of asking the Vic government to increase minimum block sizes from 300sqm to 450. Agent is advising anyone with a 600, 800 size plot who was aiming to subdivide in the future to do so now and get a planning application in. Agent said changes may come in to effect in 1 mth or 6mths.

Has anyone else received similar info? I am trying to understand the agent's purpose in telling clients this? (we are not a client). What is in it for them?
1. Being helpful so clients subdivide now. For those that have subdivided - how quick can an application be put together?
2. It would discourage clients from buying lots of this size
3. It doesn't really invite people to sell now either - particularly if those potentially buying are current clients.
4. Will this lower home values?

 

Easy to find out - which Council?

 

So odd. Makes no sense- but councils often don’t. I struggle to understand how the community benefits by us having huge backyards and restrictions on subdividing which force up property prices as it pushes people 50kms out from city centres where there’s adequate infrastructure in place to suburbs that can’t keep up with the growth

 

Sounds like a marketing scam...

 

The community benefits in quite a few ways:
- Gardens and trees help cool the environment (save on energy costs) and are also good for mental health. They look great too.

- It gives people the chance to have their kids actually play outside, not just be stuck inside in front of a screen. This encourages imagination and adventure and a bit more ‘real life’ problem solving. They can even have the joy of a vege plot and experience picking fruit off a tree in their own back yard.

- It might even help with the issue of child obesity - get them away from the pantry and fridge and running around in their yard rather than only exercising in formal sports games. The long-term health effects of obesity are going to be a huge drain on the taxpayer in future and with so many kids being driven everywhere, we need to put as many opportunities for ‘incidental excercise’ in their lives as possible.

In Melbourne, expensive areas like Kew, Toorak, Malvern etc are known as the ‘leafy suburbs’ for good reason.

 

I feel this is true it'll be interesting to see what it does it property prices.
The area has boomed over the last 18months but the numbers on a lot of the properties don't add up if you can't subdivide anything under 800sqm.
Anything over 600sqm was being advertise at subdivision potential

 

Whilst I agree with what your saying, it doesn’t support support the population growth and housing prices. With governments always trying to please FHB I’m surprised they haven’t allowed easier development to provide more housing in locations where there is already infrastructure and jobs.

Myself I like the a bit of space for the reason she you said, but I do think that 300-400m2 is more than enough for a family. We are on 1000m2 and to be honest it doesn’t get used. It’s just a chore to look after it. Our kids never go outside in the backyard now that their older. I think we are spoilt in Australia with backyard sizes. Most countries around the world survive on minimal block sizes (if any yard at all) and they still manage to avoid obesity epidemics.
I get what your saying but I just am surprised that the govts want to increase housing supply yet make developing difficult

 

I think governments are supporting medium and high density development - in selected locations near transport nodes, where people can walk to the train or bus etc.

I think there’s been lots of discussion about growth zones etc on the forum.